IN THE COURT OF LXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-72)
DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
PRESENT:
Sri. SANTHOSH C.B, B.Com, L.L.B.
L Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
C/c LXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
CRL.MISC.No. 8439 /2023
Petitioners 1. Bettaswamy Gowda
R.C,
Aged about 35 years,
S/o B. Channegowda,
R/at No.48/48, 1st Cross,
6th Main Road, Shriram
Layout, Bengaluru.
2. Manjula R.C
W/o Biligowda M.C
Aged about 38 years,
R/at Mudya Village,
Koppa Hobli, Maddur
Taluk, Mandya District.
3. Anitha
W/o Rajesh K,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at No.30/1,
Mallathahalli, Bangalore.
(By Sri.Suresha N.S Adv.)
AND
Respondent State of Karnataka,
By Jnanabharathi P S,
2
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
Bangalore.
(By the learned Public
Prosecutor)
ORDER ON BAIL APPLICATION FILED U/S.438
OF Cr.P.C.
This bail petition is filed by the petitioners under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to grant an order of
anticipatory
bail
in
the
event
of
their
arrest
Jnanabharathi P S Crime No.261/2023 for the
offences punishable U/s. 498A, 304B r/w 34 of
IPC.
2. The gist of the complaint is that deceased
Smt. Pushpalatha is the legally wedded wife of
accused No.1 and their marriage was solemnized on
24.11.2018. At the time of marriage, the parents of
the deceased have given 150 gms gold ornaments and
Rs.20,000/- cash as dowry. After their marriage, the
deceased was residing with the petitioners at Sriram
Layout, Jnanabharathi, Bengaluru and thereafter she
gave birth to a baby girl by name Tharunya. It is
3
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
alleged that since from the date of marriage, the
deceased used to call her parents and inform about
the harassment given by the accused persons. The
accused No.1 used to suspect the character of the
deceased and demanded to bring more dowry from
her parental house. On 10.08.2023, around 7.00p.m,
the complainant received a phone call stating that her
daughter committed suicide.
3. Based on the said complaint the above said
crime case came to be registered by Jnanabharathi
Police against the accused and it is against this
complaint, the petitioners who are arrayed as accused
No. 1 to 3 in the F.I.R., have preferred this bail
petition seeking anticipatory bail on various grounds.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed the
objections and re-iterated the complaint averments.
There are prima facie materials against the petitioners
to reject the bail. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the
application.

4
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
5. On going through the papers and on hearing
the arguments of both the sides, the points that arise
for my consideration are:
1. Whether the petitioners have made
out sufficient grounds to grant
anticipatory bail ?
2. What order?
6.

My
findings
on
the
above
points
are
hereunder:
Point No.1:
Point No.2:
In the Partly in the
Affirmative
As per final order,
for the following:
R EAS O N S
7. Point No.1:- It is the argument of learned
counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are
innocent of the offences alleged against them and they
have been falsely implicated in the case only to harass
them.
8. Further, it is his argument that the deceased
was using mobile phone without the knowledge of
petitioner No.1 and in that regard, he questioned the
5
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
deceased, called her parents and the deceased had
promised that she will not use mobile phone in future.
Except this incident, no other unto word incidents
have occurred and the petitioners are yet to come
across
the
contended
reason
that
behind
the
the
petitioners
suicide.
are
Further
permanent
residents in the given address, hails from respectable
family and are ready and willing to abide by any of the
conditions that may be imposed by this court in the
event they are granted bail.
9. It is further contended that the complainant
has entered into a consent deed dated 18.08.2023, in
which the petitioner No.2 has agreed to gift his self
acquired property bearing No.94 in favour of the
minor child of the deceased and in turn
complainant
shall
withdraw
the
case
within
the
3
months. In view of the said understanding the
petitioners counsel seeks to enlarge petitioners on
bail.

6
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
10. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor
contends that the offence committed by the accused
persons are heinous and committed against woman. It
is also contended that the accused persons have
driven the deceased to commit suicide by harassing
her physically and mentally demanding more dowry.
Further
contended
that
there
are
prima
facie
materials against the accused persons, the deceased
has specifically narrated about the harassment meted
out by the accused persons with her parents. When
the investigation is still under progress, she prays to
reject the bail petition.
11. In the backdrop of the above said argument
and counter argument, no doubt the offence under
S.304B of I.P.C., amongst other offences is heinous in
nature. It is alleged in the complaint that the
deceased committed suicide due to the harassment
given by the accused No.1 in suspecting her character
and on the demand of dowry. The incident has
7
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
occurred on 10.08.2023 and the case is still under
investigation.

On
perusal
of
the
statement
of
objections along with report submitted by the I.O, it
can be gathered I.O commencing the investigation has
visited the spot, conducted mahazar, recovered the
mobile phone of the deceased, saree used for hanging
etc,
recorded
the
statements
of
the
witnesses,
collected relevant documents for investigation etc.
12. The petitioners counsel contends that the
petitioners are no where connected with the death of
the deceased and a false complaint is filed to extract
money
from
the
petitioners.

To
buttress
his
contentions, a copy of consent deed is furnished in
which it discloses that petitioner No.2 has agreed to
gift his immovable property to the minor daughter of
the deceased and in turn the complainant has agreed
to withdraw the complaint.
13. However, the complainant being represented
by
his
counsel
Sri.

HRS
filed
an
application
8
U/s.301(2)
of
Cr.P.C.

seeking
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
to
assist
the
prosecution, which consequently came to be allowed.
The complainant through prosecution has furnished a
decision reported in AIR 1987 SC 737 in case of
Samundar Singh vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.
wherein it is held that in case of dowry death, it is not
prudent to grant anticipatory bail. On the strength of
this decision, he prays to reject the bail petition.
14. Prima facie the complaint averments and
other materials discloses a strong case against
accused No.1 for having harassed the deceased
physically and mentally and driving her to commit
suicide on the demand of dowry which clearly attracts
the offence U/s. 304B of IPC at this stage of the case.
Whether the petitioner No.1 is innocent of the offences
alleged or not cannot be ascertained at this stage of
the case, when the investigation is still under
progress. Hence I am of the opinion that whether the
petitioner No.1 is facing serious allegations, it is not
9
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
prudent to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail
particularly when the investigation is under progress.
15. However, petitioner No.2 & 3 being the
sister-in-laws of the deceased who happened to be
staying at their respective houses with their spouses,
I am of the opinion that they can be enlarged on bail.
The apprehensions aired by the prosecution can be
allied
by
imposing
suitable
conditions
on
the
petitioner No.2 & 3. Therefore, I answer this point in
the Partly in the affirmative.
14. Point No.2: Hence, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
The petition in respect of petitioner No.1
is hereby rejected.
The petition in respect of petitioner No.2
& 3 is allowed with conditions.
The petitioner No.2 & 3 shall be enlarged
on bail, in the event of their arrest in
Jnanabharathi P S Crime No.261/2023 on
their executing personal bond for Rs.
1,00,000/- each with a surety for the like sum
10
Crl.Misc.No.8439/2023
to the satisfaction of the arresting authority
subject to the following:
CONDITIONS
1. The petitioner No.2 & 3 shall not tamper
with the evidence and threaten the
prosecution witnesses in any manner.
2. They
shall
surrender
before
the
jurisdictional court/investigating officer
within 15 days from the date of this order
and execute personal bond with a surety
as ordered above without fail.
3. They shall appear before the court on all
the dates of hearing without fail.
(Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on the computer, corrected by
me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 15th day of September, 2023)
(SANTHOSH C.B)
C/c LXXI ACC & SJ
Bengaluru.